Kitchen-sink science? Go cautiously

MAKING SCIENCE more accessible is one way of opening the floodgates of creativity, allowing us to solve complex problems that exceed the limits of organizational capabilities, as Carolyn Y. Johnson notes in her article "Accessible science" (Page A1, Sept. 15).

But applying this approach in the realm of biology requires some caution for at least two reasons.

First, many of those getting involved in kitchen-sink DNA synthesis, such as engineers and computer programmers, have little training in biology, toxicology, or environmental science - all fields critical for impact assessments of new biological organisms.

Interestingly, one of the fundamental canons of the code of ethics of the National Society of Professional Engineers is to "perform services only in areas of their competence." Most engineers are not competent biologists.

Second, as we push this type of capacity into the hands of younger people, including undergraduates or even high school students, technological capabilities can quickly outstrip moral reasoning abilities.

Thirty years of research on moral development has shown a direct correlation between increasing age and the ability to think about complex ethical issues such as those that might be involved with the creation of an artificial life form, however primitive. Ethical reasoning just doesn't transfer as easily as the technology that can create the ethical dilemmas.

If biotechnology moves out of the lab into the kitchen, we are going to have to find a balance between supporting innovation and guaranteeing public safety.

DAVID REJESKI
Washington
The writer is director of the Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies at Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.